Telangana High Court
Mirza Matiullaj Baig Mirza ... vs The Union Of India And 5 Others on 8 November, 2021
Bench: B.Vijaysen Reddy
1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No. 17357 OF 2021
O R D E R:
Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Home and Sri B. Jitender,
learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel
representing learned Assistant Solicitor General.
The Writ Petition is filed to declare action of
Respondents 4 and 5 in continuing LOC No. 2041472, dated
Nil-03-2020 against petitioner issued by Respondent 5 even after
appearance of petitioner before the Investigation Officer in Crime
No. 10 of 2017 of P.S. Mailardevpally as being illegal, arbitrary and
unconstitutional.
Crime No. 10 of 2017 was registered on a complaint
lodged by one Sri N. Suresh Kumar against petitioner - Accused
No.3 and other three accused. After investigation, police filed
charge sheet and case was numbered as C.C. No. 1580 of 2017 on
the file of XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at
Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District, wherein petitioner was
charged for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 468 and 471
IPC. Petitioner submits that he is working as Software Engineer
from 2016 onwards and as part of employment, he frequently visits
foreign countries. It is stated that petitioner went to Germany and
returned Hyderabad on 25.12.2020. Immediately, he was detained
by Immigration Authorities stating that there is LOC against him
and he was handed over to P.S. Mailardevapally. Later, petitioner
was served with notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and he was
granted station bail on furnishing two sureties for a sum of
Rs.10,000/- each. It is stated that on an Application filed by him
under Right to Information Act, he was informed that LOC was
opened against him pursuant to Crime No. 10 of 2017. Petitioner
states that in similar circumstances, order dated 16.06.2015 was
passed in Writ Petition No. 14222 of 2015 permitting petitioner
therein to move an Application before Court concerned for
withdrawal of LOC and directions were given to the Magistrate
Court concerned to consider such Application in accordance with
law. Petitioner submits that he filed Crl.MP(SR) No. 1782 of 2021
on 10.05.2021 before XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate,
Cyberabad. The said petition was returned by the Court stating
that it is not maintainable as passport was not deposited in the
Court. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that
consistently orders were passed by this Court directing parties to
approach the Magistrate Court concerned for withdrawal of LOC.
He relies on judgment of this Court in Dasari Sudheer v. State of
Andhra Pradesh1.
Having considered the submission of learned counsel
for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader, this
Court is of the view that objection taken by Magistrate Court that
petition is not maintainable for the reason passport is not
deposited is totally unwarranted. Petitioner was granted station
bail subject to furnishing sureties. Deposit of passport cannot be a
pre-condition for entertaining Application for withdrawal of LOC.
The Magistrate Court should not have returned the Petition as
such Petition is very much maintainable.
2015(3) ALT 1
In the circumstances, Writ Petition is disposed of
directing petitioner either to re-submit CrlM.P (SR) No. 1782 of
2021 or file a fresh Application before XIV Additional Metropolitan
Magistrate Court, Cyberabad for withdrawal of LOC and on such
Application being filed, Court below shall pass orders thereon in
accordance with law and also taking into consideration the fact
that petitioner is a software professional and is required to travel
foreign destinations. Such order shall be passed within a period of
three days without insisting on deposit of passport. No costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous Applications, if any shall
stand closed.
_________________________
B.VIJAYSEN REDDY,J
08th November 2021
ksld
